Measurement of the forward-backward asymmetry in $Z/\gamma^{\ast} \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ decays and determination of the effective weak mixing angle

arXiv:1509.07645v2 [hep-ex] 16 Dec 2015

EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION EOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN)

CERN-PH-EP-2015-250
LHCb-PAPER-2015-039
24 September 2015

Measurement of the
forward-backward asymmetry in
Z/7* ^ decays and

determination of the effective weak

mixing angle

The LHCb collaborationH]

Abstract

The forward-backward charge asymmetry for the process qq —)• Zj'^* —)• is

measured as a function of the invariant mass of the dimuon system. Measurements
are performed using proton proton collision data collected with the LHCb detec¬
tor at y/s = 7 and 8TeV, corresponding to integrated luminosities of lfb“^ and
2fb“^ respectively. Within the Standard Model the results constrain the effective
electroweak mixing angle to be

sin^^^ = 0.23142 ± 0.00073 ± 0.00052 ± 0.00056,

where the first uncertainty is statistical, the second systematic and the third theo¬
retical. This result is in agreement with the current world average, and is one of the
most precise determinations at hadron colliders to date.

Published in JHEP 1511(2015) 190

© CERN on behalf of the LHCb collaboration, licence CC-BY-4.0

iAuthors are listed at the end of this paper.

11

1 Introduction

In the Standard Model (SM), the Z boson conplings differ for left- and right-handed
fermions. The difference leads to an asymmetry in the angnlar distribution of positively
and negatively charged leptons produced in Z boson decays. This asymmetry depends
on the weak mixing angle ( 6 *w) between the neutral states associated to the U(l) and
SU(2) gauge groups, i.e. the relative coupling strengths between the photon and the Z
boson. In order to compare directly with previous experimental determinations, a scheme
is adopted in which the higher order corrections to the Z boson couplings are absorbed
in effective couplings. The resulting effective parameter sin^^^ is defined as a function
of the ratio of the vector and the axial-vector effective couplings of the Z boson to the
fermions involved [^, and is proportional to sin^ 6 'w

Dehning Q* as the polar angle of the negatively charged lepton in the Collins-Soper
frame, in which the direction of the 2 ;-axis is aligned with the difference of the incoming
proton momentum vectors in the dimuon rest frame, the differential cross section in the
SM at leading order is

dcr

d cos Q*

= kl(l + cos"r) + 5cosr.

Here A and B are coefficients that depend on the dimuon invariant mass, mainly because of
interference between Z and 7 * contributions, the colour charge of the quarks and the vector
and axial-vector couplings. The parameter 5 is a function of sin^^w a.nd is proportional
to the forward-backward asymmetry Hfb, which is given by

Hfb =

Nf-Ne
Afp + -/Ve

where A^f represents the number of forward decays (cos0* > 0 ) and A^b the number of
backward decays (cos 6 ** < 0). The Collins-Soper frame is used because it minimises the
impact of the transverse momentum of the incoming quarks on the identihcation of forward
and backward decays.

In this paper the asymmetry of the angular distribution of muons in Z —)■ decay^

is measured using proton proton collision data collected by the LHCb experiment at
centre-of-mass energies of ^/s = 7 and 8 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity
of lfb“^ and 2fb“^ respectively. The asymmetry as a function of the dimuon invariant
mass is used to determine sin^^^.

Comparisons of the determinations of the weak mixing angle from processes with
different initial and final state fermions provide a test of the universality of the fermion
to Z couplings. The most accurate measurement of sin^^^ at the LEP experiments
was obtained from the forward-backward asymmetry in b quark final states [^, and at
the SLD experiment by measuring the left-right asymmetry with polarised electrons [^.
Determinations of sin^^^ have also been obtained in hadronic production processes with

^In the following Z is used to denote the Z/ 7 * contributions.

1

leptonic final states at the CDF and DO experiments at the Tevatron and ATLAS
and CMS experiments at the LHC

Measurements of Afb can be related to sin^6*^ when the momentum direction of the
initial quark and antiquark are known. At the LHC the momentum direction of the initial-
state quark is not known, diluting the ability to determine sin^^^ from Afb- However,
since at LHC the dominant production process is uu, dd —?• Z, the main contribution
originates from a collision of a valence quark with high momentum and a sea antiquark
with lower momentum, and so the Z boson tends to be boosted along the direction of
the quark. This is particularly true in the forward region where the Z boson has large
longitudinal momentum. Consequently, the sensitivity of Afb to sin^0^ is greater at
large rapidities of the Z boson. Using simulated samples, it is found that in the LHCb
acceptance the assignment of forward and backward decays is correct in 90% of the time.

The layout of this paper is as follows. Section describes the LHCb detector and the
data samples used in the analysis. The candidate selection and background determination
are described in Sec. 0 In Sec. I^the Afb measurements are presented and in Sec. [^the
measurements are compared to next-to-leading order (NLO) theoretical predictions within
the same kinematic region, and a value of sin^6*^ is determined.

2 Detector and datasets

The LHCb detector is a single-arm forward spectrometer covering the pseudorapidity
range 2 < t] < 5. The detector includes a high-precision tracking system consisting of a
silicon-strip vertex detector surrounding the pp interaction region, a large-area silicon-strip
detector located upstream of a dipole magnet with a bending power of about 4 Tm, and
three stations of silicon-strip detectors and straw drift tubes placed downstream of the
magnet. The magnet polarity can be reversed, so that detector-induced asymmetries can
be studied and corrected for in the analyses. The tracking system provides a measurement
of momentum, p, of charged particles with a relative uncertainty that varies from 0.5%
at low momentum to 1.0% at 200GeVj^ The minimum distance of a track to a primary
vertex, the impact parameter, is measured with a resolution of (15 + 29 /pt) h-ni, where px
is the component of the momentum transverse to the beam, in GeV. Different types of
charged hadrons are distinguished using information from two ring-imaging Cherenkov
detectors. Photons, electrons and hadrons are identified by a calorimeter system consisting
of scintillating-pad and preshower detectors, an electromagnetic calorimeter and a hadronic
calorimeter. Muons are identihed by a system composed of alternating layers of iron and
multiwire proportional chambers. The online event selection is performed by a trigger, that
consists of a hardware stage, based on information from the calorimeter and muon systems,
followed by a software stage, which applies a full event reconstruction. For this analysis,
candidates are triggered by at least one muon with momentum larger than 10 GeV.

Simulated samples are used to estimate the shapes of the invariant mass distributions
for the simulated signal sample and some of the background sources. The signal sample is

^Units where the speed of light is set to unity are used throughout this paper.

2

also used to correct the data for reconstruction and detector effects. In the simulation, pp
collisions are generated using Pythia 8 10,11 with a specihc LHCb configuration 12

Decays of hadronic particles are described by EvtGen 13 , in which hnal-state radiation
(FSR) is generated using Photos I^. The interaction of the generated particles with the

detector, and its response, are implemented using the Geant4 toolkit (^, as described
in Ref. 16 .

To simulate Z —)■ /i’*'/!” decays with different values of sin^0^, the next-to-leading order
generator Powheg-Box fl7|, interfaced to Pythia for the parton showering, is used.

Additional simulated samples are generated without parton showering using Powheg-Box,
Herwig 18 and Fewz 19 and are used to evaluate theoretical uncertainties. Predictions

are also obtained using Fewz at NLO and are used to provide an alternative calculation
of ApB to compare to those computed by the Powheg-Box generator. The same parton
density function (PDF) is used for both generators.

3 Event selection

Dimuon candidates, consisting of two oppositely charged muons, are selected using the
same criteria as in Ref. (^, but with an extended mass range. The two muons must
be within 2.0 < rj < 4.5, have good quality track hts, a transverse momentum greater
than 20 GeV and must combine to an invariant mass within 60 < < 160 GeV. These

requirements dehne the kinematic region of this measurement.

The purity of the candidate sample is determined by estimating the contribution from
background sources using a combination of simulation and data-driven techniques, and is
found to be greater than 99%. The total yield, reconstructed dimuon invariant mass and
Afb are determined for each source of background.

The largest background contributions come from semileptonic heavy-flavour decays and
events containing misidentihed hadrons, where hadrons punching through the calorimeters
to the muon stations are identihed as muons, or hadrons have decayed in flight. Both
contributions are estimated using data-driven techniques. Two heavy-flavour enriched
samples are selected by widening the mass window and requiring evidence that (i) the
muons are produced away from the primary vertex, or (ii) that the muons are surrounded
by hadronic activity. These two samples are combined to estimate both the shape of
the reconstructed distribution and the total number of events for the heavy-flavour
background source. The misidentihed hadron contribution is estimated by using a sample
of same-sign muon events. The Z —)■ ^ tt, single top and W~^W~ —)■

background sources are estimated using simulation. The total background contribution is
largest at low invariant mass. The charge asymmetry of each background component is
consistent with zero over the whole mass range. The distribution of the dimuon invariant
mass is shown for data and all background sources in Fig.

3

Figure 1: Dimuon invariant mass distribution for data, simulated signal and background processes
for (left) a/s = 7 TeV and (right) ^/s = 8 TeV.

4 Forward-backward asymmetry measurements

The forward-backward asymmetry is calculated from the selected dimuon candidates.
Corrections are applied to account for efficiencies, biases in the reconstructed momenta of
the muons and differences in resolution between simulation and data. Previous studies 20 -

22 have observed a dependence of trigger, track reconstruction and muon identffication

efficiencies on muon pseudorapidity. To account for this dependence, correction factors

are evaluated from data using a tag-and-probe method 20 and applied to the measured
forward-backward asymmetry.

The momentum measurement of a muon is sensitive both to uncertainties in the
detector alignment and the magnetic held scale. The magnetic held scale has been
calibrated using dimuon and other resonances at low mass and is known to a precision of
0.04% [^. Low-mass resonances have also been used as input to the detector alignment,
leading to a well-understood momentum calibration for low-momentum tracks [9,23,24

However, studies for the analysis presented here, have revealed a small, but appreciable,
dependence of the position of the Z resonance peak on muon kinematics. This ehect
can be attributed to residual detector misalignment. The corresponding muon curvature
bias can be ehectively parameterised in bins of the azimuthal angle of the muon about
the beam axis. The parameters are determined using the diherence between the Z mass
peak in data and simulation. The procedure is applied separately to data collected at
fs = 1 and 8 TeV, and for the two magnet polarities. The results are consistent with

those presented in Ref. 21 in which a slightly different method was used.

To compare with theory predictions, the data are unfolded for acceptance and resolution

effects. A Bayesian unfolding technique 25 is applied to the reconstructed dimuon invariant

mass distribution [^. The unfolding algorithm is trained on simulation by comparing
the generated invariant mass to that after reconstruction. The simulation is corrected
to have the same resolution as observed in data. Finally, the data are corrected for
background by subtracting the distribution for each background source determined as

4

Table 1: Weighted average of the absolute systematic uncertainties for ^fBj for different sources,
given separately for y/s = 7 and 8 TeV.

Source of uncertainty

75 = 7TeV

7s = 8 TeV

curvature/momentum scale

0.0102

0.0050

data/simulation mass resolution

0.0032

0.0025

unfolding parameter

0.0033

0.0009

unfolding bias

0.0025

0.0025

described in Sec. No correction is applied to the measured values of Afb to account for
the dilution due to imperfect knowledge of the initial quark direction, or to remove FSR
effects. Instead, they are compared to predictions made within the same kinematic region
and including FSR, as described in Sec.

The following systematic uncertainties are considered when determining Rfb- The
systematic uncertainty associated with the curvature correction is evaluated by varying
these parameters within their uncertainty. The uncertainties on the calibration factors
are dependent on the sample size, and are therefore larger for the ^/s = 7 TeV dataset.
This is the largest source of systematic uncertainty. An uncertainty of ±0.04% is used
for the momentum scale, determined from measurements of the magnetic held |^. The
bias in the unfolding procedure is determined from simulation by comparing unfolded
samples with the generated true distribution. An additional uncertainty to account
for the dependence on the number of iterations used in the training of the unfolding
algorithm is determined. This variation has a larger effect in regions where fewer events
are simulated. The asymmetry of each background source does not vary signihcantly over
the invariant mass range. An uncertainty of 10% is assigned to the background asymmetry,
that covers the huctuations observed in Afb for each background source. The effect of
the uncertainties in the efficiency corrections applied to the data is found to be negligible.
The systematic uncertainties are determined separately for each bin of invariant mass and
for both datasets. Their average values are summarized in Table [Tj

The resulting measurements of Afb for a/s = 7 and 8 TeV data as a function of
are shown in Fig. |^and tabulated in Tables and

5 Determination of sin^^|y^

The forward-backward asymmetry as a function of the dimuon invariant mass is compared
with several sets of SM predictions generated with different values of sin^0^, denoted as
The predictions are generated using Powheg-Box with sin^0^ values ranging from
0.22 to 0.24 for ^/s = 7 and 8 TeV, and the Z boson mass {Mz) and the electromagnetic
coupling constant (oem) fixed to the world average values [^. The PDF set from

5

1 0.6
0.5 1-
0.4 I-
0.3 1-
0.2 1 -
0.1 l-
0 l-
- 0.1 1 -
- 0.2
- 0 .

1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1“

LHCb

p^>20 GeV
2.0<t|<4.5

J <

—(— data <ls = 7 TeV
, POWHEG + PYTHIA
(sin^ejf = 0.2315)

%0 80 100 120 140 160

mpp [GeV]

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

- 0.1

- 0.2

- 0 .

1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1“

T

LHCb

p^>20 GeV
2.0<r|<4.5

data ^ = 8 TeV
POWHEG + PYTHIA
(sin^e^' = 0.2315)

%0 80 100 120 140 160

mpp [GeV]

Figure 2: The measurements of as a function of the dimuon invariant mass for data compared
to SM predictions for (left) ^/s = 7 TeV and (right) ^/s = 8 TeV. The SM predictions are calculated
using PowHEG interfaced with Pythia for parton showering with the world average value for
~ 0.2315 27 . The data include both statistical and systematic uncertainties, and the

sm

SM predictions include the theoretical uncertainties described in Sec.

NNPDF g

.JB with the strong coupling constant as{Mz) = 0.118, was used when generating
the samples.

Theoretical uncertainties associated with the distributions are taken into account
when determining sin^0^. They arise from the underlying PDF, the choice of renormali¬
sation and factorisation scales, the value of as used, and the FSR calculation. Each of
these uncertainties, referred to collectively as theoretical uncertainties, are obtained from
simulation. The same uncertainty is assigned to App'^ at both a/s = 7 and 8 TeV.

To estimate the theoretical uncertainty of the PDF set, one hundred replica samples
are produced, each with a unique PDF set provided by NNPDF 29 . The value of

RpB^ is calculated as a function of for each of these replicas, and the corresponding

confidence level interval determined. The size of this uncertainty is larger than the
difference observed using CTIO as an alternative PDF parameterisation.

Uncertainty in the PDFs affects Rps'^ in a way that is correlated across all dimuon
invariant mass bins. The same systematic uncertainty is applied for both collision energies
and is therefore fully correlated for the two samples.

The uncertainty due to the choice of renormalisation and factorisation scales is studied

The uncertainty in the sin^0^ determination

31

by varying them by a factor of 0.5 and 2
due to the uncertainty in ag is estimated by studying the impact of a variation of ± 0.002
when generating samples using Powheg-Box. This covers the current uncertainty on
For both the a., and scale uncertainties the hnal uncertainty is estimated by htting

a

27

a constant across the mass range to the maximum and minimum deviations in Rpp^ to
minimise the effect of statistical fluctuations in the samples.

The uncertainty due to the implementation of FSR is treated as a theoretical un-

3NNPDF 2.3 QCD -h QED NLO.

6

Table 2: Values for ApB with the statistical and positive and negative systematic uncertainties
for y/s = 7 TeV data. The theoretical uncertainties presented in this table, corresponding to the
PDF, scale and FSR uncertainties described in Sec. affect only the predictions of ApB and the
sin^0^ determination, and do not apply to the uncertainties on the measured ^fb-

(GeV)

Afb

stat.

syst. -f

syst. —

theoretical

60

- 72

-0.248

0.018

0.011

0.006

0.025

72

-81

-0.144

0.015

0.006

0.003

0.011

81

-86

-0.078

0.013

0.005

0.005

0.005

86

-88

-0.017

0.013

0.007

0.009

0.005

88

-89

0.016

0.013

0.012

0.008

0.005

89

-90

0.023

0.010

0.006

0.006

0.005

90

-91

0.033

0.008

0.007

0.004

0.005

91

-92

0.047

0.008

0.009

0.002

0.005

92

-93

0.082

0.010

0.004

0.010

0.006

93

- 94

0.127

0.014

0.004

0.016

0.009

94

-98

0.175

0.012

0.003

0.014

0.009

98

- 120

0.259

0.015

0.007

0.006

0.014

120

- 160

0.451

0.037

0.004

0.017

0.026

certainty. It is obtained by comparing the from three different generators, Fewz,
Herwig++ and Powheg-Box+Pythia, before and after FSR. To be consistent with
the Powheg-Box sample, the Fewz generator is confignred at NLO and electroweak
corrections are not inclnded. The maximum and minimum difference is then determined
and used to estimate the systematic uncertainty associated with FSR. The average size
of the separate theoretical uncertainties is summarised in Table and the combined
uncertainties as a function of invariant mass are given in Tables and

The shapes from Powheg-Box were cross-checked using the Fewz generator
at the same value of sin^^^ and the differences were found to be negligible.

The agreement between data and prediction is quantihed by a value dehned as the
square of the difference between the measured RpB and Rpp'^ divided by the quadratic
sum of the statistical, systematic and theoretical uncertainties, taking into account the
correlations in the uncertainties between the mass bins. A quadratic fu n ction is fitted
to the values of each set of fits as a function of sin^0^. The result is shown in Fig.
The value of sin^0^ at which takes its minimum is quoted as the final result for the
sin^0^ determination. The interval in sin^ 6 *^ corresponding to a variation of one unit
in is quoted as the uncertainty. The observed minimum values for the x^/ndf of the
fit are 0.59 and 0.58, for the 7 and 8 TeV samples, respectively. The minima correspond
to sin^^^ = 0.23219 ± 0.00148 and sin^ 6 *^ = 0.23074 ± 0.00123 respectively. Results are
cross-checked using a set of pseudoexperiments with the same statistics and background
fractions as those in data. The values of App from the pseudoexperiments are fitted to the

7

Table 3: Values for ApB with the statistical and positive and negative systematic uncertainties
for y/s = 8 TeV data. The theoretical uncertainties presented in this table, corresponding to the
PDF, scale and FSR uncertainties described in Sec. affect only the predictions of ApB and the
sin^0^ determination, and do not apply to the uncertainties on the measured ^fb-

(GeV)

ApB

stat.

syst. +

syst. —

theoretical

60

- 72

-0.217

0.014

0.015

0.014

0.025

72

-81

-0.154

0.012

0.004

0.004

0.011

81

-86

-0.046

0.010

0.003

0.002

0.005

86

-88

-0.004

0.010

0.003

0.004

0.005

88

-89

- 0.002

0.011

0.003

0.007

0.005

89

-90

0.016

0.008

0.006

0.002

0.005

90

-91

0.040

0.006

0.005

0.003

0.005

91

-92

0.053

0.006

0.004

0.002

0.005

92

-93

0.075

0.008

0.004

0.006

0.006

93

- 94

0.104

0.011

0.003

0.006

0.009

94

-98

0.166

0.010

0.005

0.006

0.009

98

- 120

0.280

0.012

0.006

0.002

0.014

120

- 160

0.412

0.027

0.005

0.009

0.026

Table 4: Weighted average of the absolute systematic uncertainties for ^pB^’ different

sources of theoretical uncertainty. The value quoted for the PDF uncertainty corresponds to the
68% confidence range, while for the others the maximum and minimum shifts are given. The
correlations among the invariant mass bins are not taken into account.

Uncertainty

average A

PDF

0.0062

scale

0.0040

Otg

0.0030

FSR

0.0016

prediction, and the spread of the measnred sin^^^ valnes agrees with the nncertainties
in the valnes of the 7 and 8 TeV samples. A combination of these results, taking into
account the correlation between systematic uncertainties for each centre-of-mass energy as
well as the invariant mass bins, is obtained by calculating the full covariance matrix for
the statistical, systematic and theoretical uncertainties. This yields

sin^^^ = 0.23142 ± 0.00073 ± 0.00052 ± 0.00056,
where the hrst uncertainty is statistical, the second systematic and the third theoretical.

8

0.228 0.229 0.23 0.231 0.232 0.233 0.234 0.235

sin^e^

Figure 3: Difference between the ^ and the minimum obtained by comparing the final
ApBi'iTT'iJ.fj.) measurements in data to calculated using values of sin^ 0 ^ ranging from 0.22

to 0.24, indicated by the crosses on the plot. A quadratic fit is used to determine the minimum
value for sin^ 0 ^ and the corresponding uncertainty, and is shown for the different centre-of-mass
energies and the combination. The black dashed horizontal line corresponds to one unit of
from the minimum and the intersecting sin^ 0 ^ for the combination are indicated by the vertical
red dashed lines.

A comparison between the sin^^^ result obtained here and those from other experiments
is shown in Fig. The LHCb result agrees well with the world average and is one of the
most precise measurements from hadron colliders.

6 Conclusions

The forward-backward asymmetry for the process gg —)• Z —)• jjA as a function of the
dimuon invariant mass is measured with the LHCb detector using proton proton collision
data collected at centre-of-mass energies of y/s = 7 and 8 TeV. The measurements are
performed in the Collins-Soper frame, using muons with pp > 20 GeV and 2.0 < p < 4.5
with a combined invariant mass 60 < < 160 GeV. The forward-backward asymmetry

for each invariant mass bin is measured, together with the statistical and experimental
uncertainties. The measurements at each centre-of-mass energy are used to determine a
value for sin^^^, by comparing to SM predictions that include FSR. The best fit values
obtained are sin^^^ = 0.23219 ± 0.00148 and sin^ 6 *^ = 0.23074 ± 0.00123 for the two
samples at ^/s = 7 and 8 TeV respectively. This leads to the combined result

sin20^ = 0.23142 ± 0.00073 ± 0.00052 ± 0.00056,
where the first uncertainty is statistical, the second systematic and the third theoretical.

9

LEP + SLD

Phys. Repl. 427 (2006) 257

LEPAFB(b)

Phys. Rept. 427 (2006) 257

SLDAlr

Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 5945

DO

Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 041801

CDF

Phys. Rev. Lett. D89 (2014) 072005

ATLAS

arXiv:1503:03709

CMS

Phys. Rev. Lett. D84 (2011) 112002

LHCb

LHCb /s=7TeV
LHCb /s=8TeV

o

o

o

mD-h

o

o

0.2315±0.0002

0.2322±0.0003

0.2310±0.0003

0.2315±0.0005

0.2315±0.0010

0.2308±0.0012

0.2287±0.0032

0.2314±0.0011
0.2329±0.0015
0.2307±0.0012

0.224 0.226 0.228 6.23 0.232 0.234

sin^Ow

Figure 4: A comparison of the sin^0^ measurement at LHCb and other experiments. The
combined LEP and SLD measurement is indicated by the vertical yellow band.

The measurement of sin^6*^ presented here agrees with previous measurements. The
uncertainty from the PDF is the dominant theoretical uncertainty. Further high precision
measurements at the LHC are expected to provide additional constraints in the forward
region and reduce this uncertainty. As the size of the data sample increases, it will become
possible to perform a measurement of ApB double-differentially in dimuon invariant mass
and rapidity. Such an approach will allow the analysis to take further advantage of the
increased sensitivity of Apu to sin^^^ in the most forward region.

Acknowledgements

We express our gratitude to our colleagues in the CERN accelerator departments for the
excellent performance of the LHC. We thank the technical and administrative staff at the
LHCb institutes. We acknowledge support from CERN and from the national agencies;
CAPES, CNPq, EAPERJ and EINEP (Brazil); NSEC (China); CNRS/IN2P3 (Erance);
BMBE, DEG and MPG (Germany); INEN (Italy); EOM and NWO (The Netherlands);
MNiSW and NCN (Poland); MEN/IFA (Romania); MinES and FANO (Russia); MinECo
(Spain); SNSF and SER (Switzerland); NASH (Ukraine); STFC (United Kingdom); NSF
(USA). We acknowledge the computing resources that are provided by CERN, IN2P3
(Erance), KIT and DESY (Germany), INEN (Italy), SURE (The Netherlands), PIC

10

(Spain), GridPP (United Kingdom), RRCKI (Rnssia), CSCS (Switzerland), IFIN-HH
(Romania), CBPF (Brazil), PL-GRID (Poland) and OSC (USA). We are indebted to the
commnnities behind the mnltiple open sonrce software packages on which we depend.
We are also thankfnl for the computing resources and the access to software R&D tools
provided by Yandex LLG (Russia). Individual groups or members have received support
from AvH Foundation (Germany), EPLANET, Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions and ERG
(European Union), Conseil General de Haute-Savoie, Labex ENIGMASS and OCEVU,
Region Auvergne (Erance), REBR (Russia), XuntaGal and GENCAT (Spain), The Royal
Society and Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851 (United Kingdom).

References

[1] ALEPH collaboration, DELPHI collaboration, L3 collaboration, OPAL collaboration,
SLD collaboration, LEP Electroweak Working Group, SLD Electroweak Group, SLD
Heavy Elavour Group, S. Schael et ai, Precision electroweak measurements on the Z
resonance, Phys. Rept. 427 (2006) 257, arXiv:hep-ex/0509008,

[2] J. Collins and D. Soper, Angular distribution of dileptons in high-energy hadron
collisions, Phys. Rev. D 16 (1977) 2219,

[3] SLD collaboration, K. Abe et ai, A high-precision measurement of the left-right Z
boson cross-section asymmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 5945.

[4] GDP collaboration, T. A. Aaltonen et ai. Indirect measurement of siif^ 9w (or Mw)

using pairs from Y/Z bosons produced inpp collisions at a center-of-momentum

energy of 1.96 TeV, Phys. Rev. D89 (2014) 072005, arXiv: 1402.2239,

[5] DO collaboration, V. M. Abazov et ai. Measurement of the effective weak mixing angle
inpp —2’/7* —>■ e+e“ events, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 041801, arXiv: 1408.5016.

[6] ATLAS collaboration, G. Aad et ai. Measurement of the forward-backward asymmetry
of electron and muon pair-production in pp collisions at y/s = 7 TeV with the ATLAS
detector, arXiv: 1503.03709,

[7] CMS collaboration, S. Chatrchyan et ai. Measurement of the weak mixing angle with
the Drell-Yan process in proton-proton collisions at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011)
112002, arXiv:1110.2682,

[8] LHCb collaboration, A. A. Alves Jr. et al. The LHCb detector at the LHC, JINST 3
(2008) S08005,

[9] LHCb collaboration, R. Aaij et al., LHCb detector performance, Int. J. Mod. Phys.
A30 (2015) 1530022, arXiv: 1412.6352,

[10] T. Sjdstrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Skands, PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual, JHEP 05
(2006) 026, arXiv:hep-ph/0603175.

11

[11] T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands, A brief introduction to PYTHIA 8.1,
Comput. Phys. Commun. 178 (2008) 852, arXiv:0710.3820,

[12] I. Belyaev et ah, Handling of the generation of primary events in Gauss, the LHCh
simulation framework, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 331 (2011) 032047,

[13] D. J. Lange, The EvtGen particle decay simulation package, Nncl. Instrnm. Meth,
A462 (2001) 152,

[14] P. Golonka and Z. Was, PHOTOS Monte Carlo: A precision tool for QED corrections
in Z and W decays, Eur. Phys. J. C45 (2006) 97, arXiv:hep-ph/0506026,

[15] Geant4 collaboration, J. Allison et ai, Geantf developments and applications, IEEE
Trans. Nncl. Sci. 53 (2006) 270.

[16] M. Glemencic et ai. The LHCh simulation application, Gauss: Design, evolution and
experience, J. Phys. Gonf. Ser. 331 (2011) 032023,

[17] S. Alioli, P. Nason, G. Oleari, and E. Re, NLO vector-boson production matched with
shower in POWHEG, JHEP 07 (2008) 060, arXiv:0805.4802,

[18] M. Bahr et ai, Herwig-h-h physics and manual, Enr. Phys. J. C58 (2008) 639,
arXiv:0803.0883,

[19] R. Gavin, Y. Li, P. Petriello, and S. Quackenbush, FEWZ 2.0: A code for hadronic
Z production at next-to-next-to-leading order, Gomput. Phys. Gommnn. 182 (2011)
2388, arXiv:1011.3540,

[20] LHGb collaboration, R. Aaij et ai. Measurement of the forward Z boson production
cross-section inpp collisions at ^/s = 7 TeV, JHEP 08 (2015) 039, arXiv: 1505.07024.

[21] LHGb collaboration, R. Aaij et ai. Measurement of the forward W boson cross-section
inpp collisions at ^/s = 7TeV, JHEP 12 (2014) 079, arXiv: 1408.4354.

[22] LHGb collaboration, R. Aaij et al. Inclusive W and Z production in the forward
region at y/s = 7 TeV, JHEP 06 (2012) 058, arXiv: 1204.1620,

[23] J. Amoraal et al.. Application of vertex and mass constraints in track-based alignment,
Nncl. Instrnm. Meth. A712 (2013) 48, arXiv: 1207.4756.

[24] LHGb collaboration, R. Aaij et ai. Measurements of the A°, and Llf baryon
masses, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 182001, arXiv: 1302.1072,

[25] G. D’Agostini, A multidimensional unfolding method based on Bayes’ theorem, Nncl.
Instrnm. Meth. A362 (1995) 487,

[26] T. Adye, Unfolding algorithms and tests using RooUnfold, in Proceedings of the
PHYSTAT 2011 workshop, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland, January 2011, CERN-2011-
006, pp 313-318, pp. 313-318, 2011. arXiv: 1105.1160,

12

[27] Particle Data Group, K. A. Olive et ai, Review of particle physics, Chin. Phys. C38
(2014) 090001,

[28] NNPDF collaboration, R. D. Ball et al, Parton distributions with LHC data, NucL
Phys. B867 (2013) 244, arXiv: 1207.1303,

[29] NNPDF collaboration, R. D. Ball et ai, Parton distributions with QED corrections,
Nucl. Phys. B877 (2013) 290, arXiv: 1308.0598.

[30] H.-L. Lai et ai. New parton distributions for collider physics, Phys. Rev. D82 (2010)
074024, arXiv:1007.2241,

[31] K. Hamilton, P. Nason, E. Re, and G. Zanderighi, NNLOPS simulation of Higgs
boson production, JHEP 10 (2013) 222, arXiv: 1309.0017,

13

LHCb collaboration

R. Aaij^®, B. Adeva^'^, M. Adinolfi^®, A. AfFolder^^, Z. Ajaltouni^, S. Akar®, J. Albrecht®,

F. Alessio^®, M. Alexander^^, S. Ali^^, G. Alkhazov^®, P. Alvarez Cartelle^^, A.A. Alves Jr®’^,

S. Amato^, S. Amerio^^, Y. Amhis^, L. An^, L. Anderlini^^, J. Anderson^®, G. Andreassi^®,

M. Andreotti^®’-^, J.E. Andrews^®, R.B. Appleby^^, O. Aquines Gutierrez^®, F. Archilli®®,

P. d’Argent^^, A. Artamonov®®, M. Artuso^®, E. Aslanides®, G. Auriemma^^’"^, M. Baalouch®,
S. Bachmann^^, J.J. Back^®, A. Badalov®®, G. Baesso®®, W. Baldini®®’®®, R.J. Barlow®^,

C. Barschel®®, S. Barsuk^, W. Barter®®, V. Batozskaya^®, V. Battista®®, A. Bay®®, L. Beaucourt^,

J. Beddow®®, E. Bedeschi®®, I. Bediaga®, L.J. Bel^®, V. Bellee®®, N. Belloli^®’-^, 1. Belyaev®®,

E. Ben-Halm®, G. Bencivenni®®, S. Benson®®, J. Benton^®, A. Berezhnoy®^, R. Bernet*®®,

A. Bertolin^®, M.-O. Bettler®®, M. van Beuzekom®®, A. Bien®®, S. Bifani®®, P. Billoir®, T. Bird®®,
A. Birnkraut®, A. Bizzeti®^’^, T. Blake®®, E. Blanc®®, J. Blouw®®, S. Blusk®®, V. Bocci^®,

A. Bondar®®, N. Bondar®®’®®, W. Bonivento®®, S. Borghi®®, M. Borsato'^, T.J.V. Bowcock®^,

E. Bowen®®, G. Bozzi®®, S. Braun®®, M. Britsch®®, T. Britton®®, J. Brodzicka®®, N.H. Brook®®,
E. Buchanan®®, A. Bursche®®, J. Buytaert®®, S. Gadeddu®®, R. Galabrese®®’'^, M. Galvi^®’-^,

M. Galvo Gomez®®’", P. Gampana®®, D. Gampora Perez®®, L. Gapriotti®®, A. Garbone®®’*^,

G. Carboni^®’^, R. Cardinale®®’*, A. Cardini®®, P. Carniti^®’-^, L. Carson®®, K. Carvalho Akiba^’®®,

G. Casse®^, L. Cassina^®’-^, L. Castillo Garcia®®, M. Cattaneo®®, Ch. Cauet®, G. Cavallero®®,

R. Cenci^®’^, M. Charles®, Ph. Charpentier®®, M. Chefdeville®, S. Chen®®, S.-E. Cheung®®,

N. Chiapolini®®, M. Chrzaszcz®®, X. Cid Vidal®®, G. Ciezarek®®, P.E.L. Clarke®®, M. Clemencic®®,

H. V. ClifF®^, J. Closier®®, V. Coco®®, J. Cogan®, E. Cogneras®, V. Cogoni®®’", L. Cojocariu^®,

G. CollazuoP^, P. Collins®®, A. Comerma-Montells®®, A. Contu®®, A. Cook®®, M. Coombes®®,

S. Coquereau®, G. Corti®®, M. Corvo®®’'^, B. Couturier®®, G.A. Cowan®®, D.C. Craik®®,

A. Crocombe®®, M. Cruz Torres®®, S. CunlifFe®®, R. Currie®®, C. D’Ambrosio®®, E. Dall’Occo®®,

J. Dalseno®®, P.N.Y. David®®, A. Davis®®”, O. De Aguiar Erancisco^, K. De Bruyn®,

S. De Capua®®, M. De Clan®®, J.M. De Miranda®, L. De Paula^, P. De Simone®®, C.-T. Dean®®,

D. Decamp®, M. DeckenhofF®, L. Del Buono®, N. Deleage®, M. Demmer®, D. Derkach®®,

O. Deschamps®, P. Dettori®®, B. Dey^®, A. Di Canto®®, E. Di Ruscio^®, H. Dijkstra®®,

S. Donleavy®^, P. Dordei®®, M. Dorigo®®, A. Dosil Suarez®”®, D. Dossett®®, A. Dovbnya®®,

K. Dreimanis®^, L. DuFour®®, G. Dujany®®, P. Dupertuis®®, P. Durante®®, R. Dzhelyadin®®,

A. Dziurda^®, A. Dzyuba®®, S. Paso®®’®®, U. Egede®®, V. Egorychev®®, S. Eidelman®®,

S. Eisenhardt®®, U. Eitschberger®, R. EkelhoF®, L. Eklund®®, I. El RlFai®, Ch. Elsasser®®,

S. Ely®®, S. Esen®®, H.M. Evans®”®, T. Evans®®, A. Palabella®®, C. Parber®®, N. Parley®®,

S. Farry®^, R. Fay®^, D. Ferguson®®, V. Fernandez Albor®®”, F. Ferrari®®, F. Ferreira Rodrigues®,
M. Ferro-Luzzi®®, S. Filippov®®, M. Fiore®®’®®’'^, M. Fiorini®®’-^, M. Firlej^”^, C. Fitzpatrick®®,

T. Fiutowski^®”, K. Fohl®®, P. Fol®®, M. Fontana®®, F. Fontanelli®®’*, R. Forty®®, M. Frank®®,

C. Frei®®, M. Frosini®®”, J. Fu^®, E. PurFaro^®’^, A. Gallas Torreira®”^, D. Galli®®’^, S. Gallorini^^,

S. Gambetta®®, M. Gandelman^, P. Gandini®®, Y. Gao®, J. Garcia Pardihas®”^, J. Garra Tico®®”,

L. Garrido®®, D. Gascon®®, C. Caspar®®, R. Gauld®®, L. Gavardi®, G. Gazzoni®, D. Gerick®®,

E. Gersabeck®®, M. Gersabeck®®, T. Gershon®®, Ph. Ghez®, S. Giani®®, V. Gibson®”^,

O. G. Girard®®, L. Giubega^®, V.V. Gligorov®®, C. Gobel®®, D. Golubkov®®, A. Golutvin®®’®®,

A. Gomes®’", C. Gotti^®’-^, M. Grabalosa Gandara®, R. Graciani Diaz®®, L.A. Granado Cardoso®®,
E. Grauges®®, E. Graverini®®, G. Graziani®”^, A. Grecu^®, E. Greening®®, S. Gregson®®”,

P. Griffith®®, L. Grillo®®, O. Griinberg®®, B. Gui®®, E. Gushchin®®, Yu. Guz®®’®®, T. Gys®®,

T. Hadavizadeh®®, C. Hadjivasiliou®®, G. Haefeli®®, C. Haen®®, S.C. Haines®®”, S. Hall®®,

14

B. Hamilton^®, X. Han^^, S. Hansmann-Menzemer^^, N. Harnew^®, S.T. Harnew^®, J. Harrison^^,
J. He^®, T. Head^®, V. Heijne^^, K. Hennessy®^, P. Henrard^, L. Henry®, E. van Herwijnen®®,

M. Hefi®®, A. Hicheur^, D. M. Hoballah®, C. Hombach^^, W. Hulsbergen^^, T. Humair^®,

N. Hussain^^, D. Hutchcroft®^, D. Hynds^^, M. Idzik^^, P. Ilten^®, R. Jacobsson®®, A. Jaeger^®,

J. Jalocha®®, E. Jans^^, A. Jawahery^®, E. Jing®, M. John^®, D. Johnson®®, C.R. Jones^^,

C. Joram®®, B. Jost®®, N. Jurik®®, S. Kandybei^®, W. Kanso®, M. Karacson®®, T.M. Karbach®®d,

S. Karodia®^, M. Kecke^^, M. Kelsey®®, I.R. Kenyon^®, M. Kenzie®®, T. Ketel^^, E. Khairullin®®,
B. Khanji^®’®®’-^, C. Khurewathanakul®®, S. Klaver®^, K. Klimaszewski^®, O. Kochebina^,

M. Kolpin^^, I. Komarov®®, R.E. Koopman^^, P. Koppenburg^^’®®, M. Kozeiha®, L. Kravchuk®®,

K. Kreplin^^, M. Kreps^®, G. Krocker^®, P. Krokovny®^, P. Kruse®, W. Krzemien^®,

W. Kucewicz^®’”, M. Kucharczyk^®, V. Kudryavtsev®^, A. K. Kuonen®®, K. Kurek^®,

T. Kvaratskheliya®^, D. Lacarrere®®, G. LafFerty®^, A. Lai^®, D. Lambert®®, G. Lanfranchi^®,

G. Langenbruch^®, B. Langhans®®, T. Latham^®, G. Lazzeroni^®, R. Le Gac®, J. van Leerdam^^,
J.-P. Lees*^, R. Lefevre®, A. Leflat®^’®®, J. Lefrangois'^, E. Lemos Gid®^, O. Leroy®, T. Lesiak^®,
B. Leverington^®, Y. Li^, T. Likhomanenko®®’®^, M. Liles®^, R. Lindner®®, G. Linn®®,

P. Lionetto^®, B. Liu^®, X. Liu®, D. Loh^®, 1. LongstafF®^, J.H. Lopes^, D. Lucchesi^^’'?,

M. Lucio Martinez®^, H. Luo®®, A. Lupato^^, E. Luppi^®’-^, O. Lupton®®, A. Lusiani^®,

P. MacheFert^, E. Maciuc^®, O. Maev®®, K. Maguire®^, S. Malde®®, A. Malinin®^, G. Manca’^,

G. Mancinelli®, P. Manning®®, A. Mapelli®®, J. Maratas®, J.E. Marchand^, U. Marconi^^,

G. Marin Benito®®, P. Marino^®’®®’^, J. Marks^^, G. Martellotti^®, M. Martin®, M. Martinelli®®,

D. Martinez Santos®'^, P. Martinez Vidal®®, D. Martins Tostes^, A. MassafFerri^, R. Matev®®,

A. Mathad^®, Z. Mathe®®, G. Matteuzzi^®, A. Mauri^®, B. Maurin®®, A. Mazurov^®,

M. McGann®®, J. McGarthy^®, A. McNab®^, R. McNulty^^, B. Meadows®'^, P. Meier®,

M. Meissner^^, D. Melnychuk^®, M. Merk^®, E Michielin^^, D.A. Milanes®^, M.-N. Minard^,

D. S. Mitzel^^, J. Molina Rodriguez®®, LA. Monroy®^, S. Monteil®, M. Morandin^^,

P. Morawski^^, A. Morda®, M.J. Morello^®’^, J. Moron^^, A.B. Morris®®, R. Mountain®®,

E. Muheim®®, D. Miiller®^, J. Muller®, K. Mriller^®, V. Muller®, M. Mussini^^, B. Muster®®,

P. Naik^®, T. Nakada®®, R. Nandakumar^®, A. Nandi®®, 1. Nasteva^, M. Needham®®, N. Neri^^,
S. Neubert^^, N. NeuFeld®®, M. Neuner^®, A.D. Nguyen®®, T.D. Nguyen®®, G. Nguyen-Mau®®’^,
V. Niess®, R. Niet®, N. Nikitin®^, T. Nikodem^^, A. Novoselov®®, D.P. O’Hanlon^®,

A. Oblakowska-Mucha^^, V. Obraztsov®®, S. Ogilvy®^, O. Okhrimenko^^, R. Oldeman^®’®,
G.J.G. Onderwater®^, B. Osorio Rodrigues^, J.M. Otalora Goicochea^, A. Otto®®, P. Owen®®,
A. Oyanguren®®, A. Palano^®’"^, P. Palombo^^’*, M. Palutan^®, J. Panman®®, A. Papanestis^®,

M. Pappagallo®^, L.L. Pappalardo^®’-^, G. Pappenheimer®^, W. Parker®®, G. Parkes®^,

G. Passaleva^’^, G.D. Patel®^, M. Patel®®, G. Patrignani^®’*, A. Pearce®^’^®, A. Pellegrino^^,

G. Penso^®’*, M. Pepe Altarelli®®, S. Perazzini^^’*^, P. Perret®, L. Pescatore^®, K. Petridis^®,

A. Petrolini^®’*, M. Petruzzo^^, E. Picatoste Olloqui®®, B. Pietrzyk^, T. Pilar^®, D. Pinci^®,

A. Pistone^®, A. Piucci®^, S. PlayFer®®, M. Plo Gasasus®^, T. Poikela®®, E. Polci®,

A. Poluektov^®’®^, 1. Polyakov®^, E. Polycarpo^, A. Popov®®, D. Popov^®’®®, B. Popovici^®,

G. Potterat^, E. Price^®, J.D. Price®^, J. Prisciandaro®^, A. Pritchard®^, G. Prouve^®,

V. Pugatch^^, A. Puig Navarro®®, G. Punzi^®’'", W. Qian^, R. Quagliani^de^ g_ RachwaP®,

J. H. Rademacker^®, M. Rama^®, M.S. Rangel^, 1. Raniuk^®, N. Rauschmayr®®, G. Raven^^,

P. Redi®®, S. Reichert®^, M.M. Reid^®, A.G. dos Reis^, S. Ricciardi^®, S. Richards^®, M. Rihl®®,

K. Rinnert®^, V. Rives Molina®®, P. Robbe^’®®, A.B. Rodrigues^, E. Rodrigues®^,

J.A. Rodriguez Lopez®^, P. Rodriguez Perez®^, S. Roiser®®, V. Romanovsky®®,

A. Romero Vidal®^, J. W. Ronayne^^, M. Rotondo^^, J. Rouvinet®®, T. RuF®®, P. Ruiz Vails®®,

15

J.J. Saborido Silva^^, N. Sagidova^^, P. Sail^^, B. Saitta^^’®, V. Salustino Guimaraes^,

C. Sanchez Mayordomo®®, B. Sanmartin Sedes^^, R. Santacesaria^^, C. Santamarina Rios^^,

M. Santimaria^®, E. Santovetti^^’^, A. Sarti^®’^, C. Satriano^^’™, A. Satta^^, D.M. Saunders^®,

D. Savrina®^’®^, M. Schiller®®, H. Schindler®®, M. Schlupp^, M. Schmelling^®, T. Schmelzer®,

B. Schmidt®®, O. Schneider®®, A. Schopper®®, M. Schubiger®®, M.-H. Schune^, R. Schwemmer®®,
B. Sciascia^®, A. Sciubba^®’^, A. Semennikov®^, N. Serra*^®, J. Serrano®, L. Sestini^^, P. Seyfert^®,

M. Shapkin®®, I. Shapoval®®’^®’'^, Y. Shcheglov®®, T. Shears®^, L. Shekhtman®^, V. Shevchenko®^,

A. Shires®, B.G. Siddi®®, R. Silva Goutinho^®’^®, L. Silva de Oliveira^, G. Simi^^, M. Sirendi^'^,

N. Skidmore^®, T. Skwarnicki®®, E. Smith®®’^®, E. Smith®®, I.T. Smith®®, J. Smith^’^, M. Smith®^,
H. Snoek^®, M.D. SokolofF®®"’®®, E.J.P. Soler®®, E. Soomro®®, D. Souza^®, B. Souza De Paula^,

B. Spaan®, P. Spradlin®®, S. Sridharan®®, P. Stagni®®, M. Stahl®®, S. Stahl®®, S. Stefkova®®,

O. Steinkamp®®, O. Stenyakin®®, S. Stevenson®®, S. Stoica^®, S. Stone®®, B. Storaci^®,

S. Stracka^®’^, M. Straticiuc^®, U. Straumann^®, L. Sun®®”, W. Sutcliffe®®, K. Swientek^®”,

S. Swientek®, V. Syropoulos^^, M. Szczekowski^®, T. Szamlak^®”, S. T’Jampens"®, A. Tayduganov®,

T. Tekampe®, M. Teklishyn®”, G. Tellarini®®’-^, E. Teubert®®, G. Thomas®®, E. Thomas®®,

J. van Tilburg^®, V. Tisserand^, M. Tobin®®, J. Todd®®", S. Tolk^^, L. Tomassetti®®’-^, D. Tonelli®®,
S. Topp-Joergensen®®, N. Torr®®, E. Tournefier^, S. Tourneur®®, K. Trabelsi®®, M.T. Tran®®,

M. Tresch^®, A. Trisovic®®, A. Tsaregorodtsev®, P. Tsopelas^®, N. Tuning^®’®®, A. Ukleja^®,

A. Ustyuzhanin®®’®^, U. Uwer®^®, G. Vacca®^®’®, V. Vagnoni®^, G. Valenti®^, A. Vallier®",

R. Vazquez Gomez®®, P. Vazquez Regueiro®®”, G. Vazquez Sierra®®”, S. Vecchi®®, J.J. Velthuis^®,
M. Veltri®®”’^, G. Veneziano®®, M. Vesterinen®®, B. Viaud®”, D. Vieira^, M. Vieites Diaz®®”,

X. Vilasis-Gardona®®’°, V. Volkov®^, A. Vollhardt^®, D. Volyanskyy®®, D. Voong^®,

A. Vorobyev®®, V. Vorobyev®^, C. Vofi®®, J.A. de Vries®®, R. Waldi®®, C. Wallace"®®, R. Wallace®^,
J. Walsh^®, S. Wandernoth®®, J. Wang®®, D.R. Ward®®”, N.K. Watson®®, D. Websdale®®,

A. Weiden®®, M. Whitehead®®, G. Wilkinson®®’®®, M. Wilkinson®®, M. Williams®®,

M.P. Williams®®, M. Williams®®, T. Williams®®, P.P. Wilson®®, J. Wimberley®®, J. Wishahi®,
W. Wislicki^s, M. Witek^®, G. Wormser^ S.A. Wotton®”^, S. Wright®”^, K. Wyllie®®, Y. Xie®®,

Z. Xu®®, Z. Yang®, J. Yu®®, X. Yuan®®, O. Yushchenko®®, M. Zangoli®®, M. Zavertyaev®®’®,

L. Zhang®, Y. Zhang®, A. Zhelezov®®, A. Zhokhov®®, L. Zhong®, S. Zucchelli®®.

^Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Fisicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
^ Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
^Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
“^LAPP, Universite Savoie Mont-Blanc, CNRS/IN2P3, Annecy-Le-Vieux, France
^Clermont Universite, Universite Blaise Pascal, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
^CPPM, Aix-Marseille Universite, CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France
UAL, Universite Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France

^LPNHE, Universite Pierre et Marie Curie, Universite Paris Diderot, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, Prance
^Fakultat Physik, Technische Universitat Dortmund, Dortmund, Cermany
Max-Planck-Institut fiir Kernphysik (MPIK), Heidelberg, Cermany
Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universitdt Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Cermany
School of Physics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
^^Sezione INFN di Bari, Bari, Italy
^'^Sezione INPN di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
^^Sezione INFN di Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
^^Sezione INFN di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
Sezione INFN di Firenze, Firenze, Italy
Laboratori Nazionali dell INFN di Frascati, Frascati, Italy

16

^^Sezione INFN di Genova, Genova, Italy
“^^Sezione INFN di Milano Bicocca, Milano, Italy
^^Sezione INFN di Milano, Milano, Italy
‘^‘^Sezione INFN di Padova, Padova, Italy
"^^Sezione INFN di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
^^Sezione INFN di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy
^^Sezione INFN di Roma La Sapienza, Roma, Italy
Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland
AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Gomputer Science,
Krakow, Poland

National Genter for Nuclear Research (NGBJ), Warsaw, Poland
'^^Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest-Magurele, Romania
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute (PNPI), Gatchina, Russia
Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics (ITEP), Moscow, Russia
Institute of Nuclear Physics, Moscow State University (SINP MSU), Moscow, Russia
Institute for Nuclear Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences (INR RAN), Moscow, Russia
^^Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics (SB RAS) and Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, Russia
Institute for High Energy Physics (IHEP), Protvino, Russia
Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Universidad de Santiago de Gompostela, Santiago de Gompostela, Spain
European Organization for Nuclear Research (GERN), Geneva, Switzerland
^^Ecole Polytechnique Federate de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
Physik-Institut, Universitat Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The
Netherlands

^^NSG Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology (NSG KIPT), Kharkiv, Ukraine
Institute for Nuclear Research of the National Academy of Sciences (KINR), Kyiv, Ukraine
University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
^^H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
Gavendish Laboratory, University of Gambridge, Gambridge, United Kingdom
Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Goventry, United Kingdom
STFG Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom

School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Imperial Gollege London, London, United Kingdom

School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
^^Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Gambridge, MA, United States
University of Gincinnati, Gincinnati, OH, United States
University of Maryland, Gollege Park, MD, United States
Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, United States

Pontificia Universidade Gatolica do Rio de Janeiro (PUG-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, associated to ^
Institute of Particle Physics, Gentral Ghina Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, Ghina, associated to ^
Departamento de Fisica , Universidad Nacional de Golombia, Bogota, Golombia, associated to ®
^^Institut fiir Physik, Universitat Rostock, Rostock, Germany, associated to
^"^National Research Gentre Kurchatov Institute, Moscow, Russia, associated to
Yandex School of Data Analysis, Moscow, Russia, associated to
^^Instituto de Fisica Gorpuscular (IFIG), Universitat de Valencia-GSIG, Valencia, Spain, associated to
Van Swinderen Institute, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands, associated to

17

Universidade Federal do Triangula Mineiro (UFTM), Uheraba-MG, Brazil
^P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Russian Academy of Science (LPI RAS), Moscow, Russia
Universitd di Bari, Bari, Italy
‘^Universitd di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
® Universitd di Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
^ Universitd di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
® Universitd di Urbino, Urbino, Italy
^ Universitd di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy

* Universitd di Genova, Genova, Italy

^ Universitd di Milano Bicocca, Milano, Italy
^ Universitd di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy

* Universitd di Roma La Sapienza, Roma, Italy
™ Universitd della Basilicata, Potenza, Italy

‘^AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Computer Science, Electronics and
Telecommunications, Krakow, Poland

°LIFAELS, La Salle, Universitat Ramon Hull, Barcelona, Spain
P Hanoi University of Science, Hanoi, Viet Nam
^ Universitd di Padova, Padova, Italy
’’ Universitd di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
‘^Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy
‘ Universitd degli Studi di Milano, Milano, Italy

"^Deceased

18